Revised DR

[Celtavian]

Re

From a DM's perspective, the new DR will greatly improve the game. DR was a moot point once a person obtained a high enough plus weapon.

I just don't hope they go too wacky on materials. That will be the only downpoint of DR for me is they create too many creatures with wacky material requirements that require the carrying of an assortment of strange weapons.

I still think Holy swords should bust the DR of all evil outsiders. I don't care if they explain it as a mixing of materials into one blade or because the blade is infused with holy power, a person should not have to carry around a variety of holy swords for different enemies. That would be kind of stupid.

 

[Staffan]

Re: Re

I still think Holy swords should bust the DR of all evil outsiders. I don't care if they explain it as a mixing of materials into one blade or because the blade is infused with holy power, a person should not have to carry around a variety of holy swords for different enemies. That would be kind of stupid.

At the very least, the Holy extra damage should bypass DR on account of not being physical damage, just like the fire damage of a flaming sword would.

 

[Malin Genie]

Maybe I'm alone here, but I would have preferred to see just DR X/-. Maybe 2/- or 3/- for lesser evils, 5/- or so for midrange, up to 10/- or so for the pit fiend.

You could introduce vulnerabilities - silver weapons deal +1d6 damage to lycanthropes; cold iron deals +1d6 to fey (or cold iron inflicts one negative level on fey, or cold iron forces fey to save or be stunned, etc) which gives a lot of room for creativity and variation, without interfering with the fundamental idea of giving creatures DR.

To me that makes DR significant, but not overwhelming. Creatures with DR get some enhanced survivability, and you avoid the whole golf-bag-'o-weaponry. No spell can get rid of DR, but it's not at the 15/ level where unless you have the right weapon don't bother coming to the party (yes, I realise 50/X was worse, but as rightly pointed out, many fighters will be able to penetrate 15/, few will be able to deal significant damage through it.)

 

[Simulacrum]

Hehe, dont get me wrong here, but some of you guys are very dorky. The funniest thing is how some try to hide that behind trying to be VERY SERIOUS.
You shoud listen to yourselves, you are obviously all from the same pitty party mantra, "Thou who use the new rules are doomed, for ETERNITY (yes for ever and ever over and out ), thou shalt suffer from not sticking to the old and ONLY TRUE game ov 3E.
-
Yeah all the fun is gone...for EVER, and its never coming back again...NEVER. Thats it folks you heard it!

--->whine, sob, bitch, whatever......

[irony/ON] [irony/OFF]

(copy pasted out of another thread.)

 

[Ferox4]

Maybe I'm alone here, but I would have preferred to see just DR X/-. Maybe 2/- or 3/- for lesser evils, 5/- or so for midrange, up to 10/- or so for the pit fiend.

You could introduce vulnerabilities - silver weapons deal +1d6 damage to lycanthropes; cold iron deals +1d6 to fey (or cold iron inflicts one negative level on fey, or cold iron forces fey to save or be stunned, etc) which gives a lot of room for creativity and variation, without interfering with the fundamental idea of giving creatures DR.

To me that makes DR significant, but not overwhelming. Creatures with DR get some enhanced survivability, and you avoid the whole golf-bag-'o-weaponry. No spell can get rid of DR, but it's not at the 15/ level where unless you have the right weapon don't bother coming to the party (yes, I realise 50/X was worse, but as rightly pointed out, many fighters will be able to penetrate 15/, few will be able to deal significant damage through it.)

I tried something like this out a few weeks ago with a Monster of Legend (MM2) and it worked out pretty well. The players were shocked that the creature was survivng all the damage they were leveling upon it and they kept reminding me of what weapons they were using (I gave it a straight DR 10)....I wanted to see if it "felt" better than the standard DR, and I must admit it made the combat a great deal more interesting.

 

[Brown Jenkin]

Hehe, dont get me wrong here, but some of you guys are very dorky. The funniest thing is how some try to hide that behind trying to be VERY SERIOUS.
You shoud listen to yourselves, you are obviously all from the same pitty party mantra, "Thou who use the new rules are doomed, for ETERNITY (yes for ever and ever over and out ), thou shalt suffer from not sticking to the old and ONLY TRUE game ov 3E.
-
Yeah all the fun is gone...for EVER, and its never coming back again...NEVER. Thats it folks you heard it!

--->whine, sob, bitch, whatever......

[irony/ON] [irony/OFF]

(copy pasted out of another thread.)

I support 95% of the new rules that have been previewed so far and was looking forward to what we were promised, minor tweeks, clarifications, and 100% backwards compatability. The only thing I am complaining about is this 1 change which is broken as a rule from my point of view and which at the same time makes many of the materials I have purchased for 3E no longer usable as is. I have spent a couple of thousand dollars on 3E material and will not be drawn into the CCG money pit with my roleplaying. If D&D is going to release incompatable versions every 3 years I won't play that money game. If I am forced to switch to 3.5 to play with others (Its nearly impossible to find 1.0 or 2.0 games anymore) I can guarntee you that I will only be spending the $60 on a PH and DMG from now on. If I need anything else in a game I can borrow it from the person who owns it and wants to use it. Its been a fun ride, I don't regret it, but now it is time to get off.

 

[mmu1]

Maybe I'm alone here, but I would have preferred to see just DR X/-. Maybe 2/- or 3/- for lesser evils, 5/- or so for midrange, up to 10/- or so for the pit fiend.

You could introduce vulnerabilities - silver weapons deal +1d6 damage to lycanthropes; cold iron deals +1d6 to fey (or cold iron inflicts one negative level on fey, or cold iron forces fey to save or be stunned, etc) which gives a lot of room for creativity and variation, without interfering with the fundamental idea of giving creatures DR.

To me that makes DR significant, but not overwhelming. Creatures with DR get some enhanced survivability, and you avoid the whole golf-bag-'o-weaponry. No spell can get rid of DR, but it's not at the 15/ level where unless you have the right weapon don't bother coming to the party (yes, I realise 50/X was worse, but as rightly pointed out, many fighters will be able to penetrate 15/, few will be able to deal significant damage through it.)

Nope... Definitely not alone.

I've been toying with the same idea of it for a while.

I always saw DR strictly as a way of making monsters harder to kill without increasing their damage output, saves, skills, etc., and never liked the idea of not being able to kills something unless you have exactly the right weapon to do it.
Fixed DR, with values of, say, 2, 5 and 10 would do reasonably good job of making monsters tougher without being so noticeable people would immediately resort ot meta-gaming or using special weapons to get around it...

With the new rules, people seem to think that the whole idea of needing specific materials somehow encourages creative thinking, and that it's great and exciting because it's so prevalent in legend and fantasy... Bunk.

The reason this works well in books and movies is because it adds to the drama, and because, for the most part, it's a situation that comes up once per story. If you're playing a D&D game, it's going to come up over and over, reducing it to being absurd. If you're just telling a D&D story, you don't need the new rules because that's not the point anyway.
As for creativity, as someone said, the creative "option" of dealing with the enemy should be available even if you don't remove the standard one of just hitting it until it dies... Otherwise it's not an option, it's a puzzle.

I'm all for special materials coming up, rarely, in climactic moments, and doing something interesting to the opposition, but making it commonplace doesn't strike me as a good idea.

 

[Petrosian]

Petrosian, how do you handle SR and resistances/immunities? As far as I see it, DR is to fighters what SR/resistances/immunities are to spellcasters. Have you got complaints from the spellcasters about being forced into preparing a spell of each energy type in case they encounter a resistant foe, and then complaining that after casting that spell they were useless?

OK first to deal with the seemingly mandatory hyperbole the pre-designer-dr side has to engage in.

"useless" has not been a term used by me to describe the effects of the new designer-dr. While some of the pro-designer-dr crowd wants to see those who question the results of this new rule as people whining about overexaggerated penalties, thats not the point i have been arguing at all.

So now to deal with the specific "i missed the boat totally" questions you asked.

No, none of my players have complained about being useless after SR encounters. Thank you for asking.

However, since no claim of the new designer-dr making anyone feel "useless" has been uttered by me, this question seems as relevent to this discussion as asking me what underwear i am wearing.

You seem to want me to defend a position i never took.

I wont bite.

How do my players, as well as I, handle SR heavy encounters?

The less imaginative players/characters throw spells and say "so what". They just slam into the wall hoping enough spells luck out and overcome the barrier. These guys will likely be the ones to eventaully spend feats on improving the spell chances. This is analogous to the simple fighter who just slams away with his main sword ...what was it the pro-designer-dr guy said... and "pray for crits."

Fortunately i have none of those routinely in my games as players. Sometimes my players have a bad night tho. I most often encounter these in my fellow players when i play.

The players under me tend to take a different approach. When they prepare (choosing spells for sor or learning spells for others) they often choose spells (or items) that will be unaffected by SR. For example, the sor when facing a potent SR will switch from direct spells to buffing spells for the PCs (haste on fighters, endurances, stoneskins, etc) to enable them to kill it and survive it more quickly. They will also look to effective spells such as fog cloud (if the beastie is using targetted sla) or even dispel magics (if the beastie is buffed or if allies are under holds and the like) and so on. Their basic method, with good preparatory choices made in anticipation of this potential situation occuring, is to get around the SR so that it does not apply. This is analagous to the fighter who totes the haversack of exotic weapons so that he switches to different weapons that gets around the designer-dr instead of rushing uphill so to speak and just trying to bull through it.

The non-analogous parts comes from the cost. The sorcerer had to make his tough choice to decide whether to give up a precious spell slot on wall of fog or endurance and so on to help cover heavy sr encounters where the more direct spells are adversely affected.

The fighter, on the other hand, has to give up very little given the cost of silvered weapons as an example, to get the golfbag to cover his arse against the designer-dr.

Its not a tough choice at all for the fighter. its just a sensible inventory control problem.

Giving the sorcerer a more complex and full of options spell choice makes his player typically have more fun. Giving the fighter a tougher inventory and accounting challenge usually wont.

Thats part of the downside of designer-dr. Its counters are simple no brainers. No tough choices. Just simple obvious bookkeeping.

its a yawner.

unless, you are the type who by character design wont gon in for those "gameisms" and in which case for that devotion to character concept... you will pay the price.

Again, this seems to be targetting for adverse effects the wrong guys. It appears to be a very inaccurately targetted rule. Unless the goal is to slap those silly role players upside the head and shout "what are you thinking? This is DND! We will have none of that "character" stuff here! Get a clue, play the GAME not the charactergeesh! Some people!"

If that is its gaol, it seems dead spot on target.

 

[Technik4]

Hey petrosian, you can stop harping on the symantics of what is being said. If you never said that specific material DR is "useless" you said it in between the lines. So get over it.

You still have never even taken the time to think that they may alter the economic element in the game, making silvered and cold ironed weapons more expensive, thus forcing the fighters to use different tactics. Many of which have been listed numerous times. No they can't just switch to their "sword of buffing" and help out in that way, but they can act as a shield for the party, etc etc. This argument is old, your position doesnt even have any passion in it.

Youre fighting against "designer" DR (as you call it) because it rewards munchkins, assuming the cost of special material weapons is not taken into account. No, that isnt something you said, I paraphrased.

Well in your next point-by-point post (which gets rather tedious, rereading what everyone wrote a little further up the page) can you consider what they can do to make the new DR work? Or is it just impossible and not worth your time since you dont have any issues with the old DR (apparantly).

The new "tough choice" for fighters will be what kind of weapon they take all their feats in (at least, in my interpretation where special materials are expensive). This is analagous to the "tough choice" sorcerors have to make when choosing spells. The fact is, the "choice" now, is to merely get a weapon with sure-striking (if you are in FR or using one of many splat books) or to get GMW cast on your sword. Can you not see how the new DR encourages more "rolplaying" and "tough choices" for the fighting classes?

For instance, heres my example:

Weapon 1-150 gold, normal
Masterwork Weapon +300 gold
Silver Weapon +500 gold
Cold Iron Weapon +500 gold
Copper Weapon +500 gold
Holysiver Weapon +1,000 gold

And so on. You wont have a golf-bag of weapons at those costs for quite some time. And honestly, as I was trying to point out in a previous post, it wouldnt be worth it to switch in a lot of instances.

Example
Your main weapon is a +1 Flaming Lonsword, you are fighting a DR 5/something beast. Do you, start dropping and drawing weapons in an attempt to get the correct normal weapon to combat it, or do you activate the flame and fight on? Your flaming enchantment may get eaten up by the DR, but youre still going to punch through with almost as much damage as you would by switching to one of your other clu--swords.

In fact, your precious collection of weapons might have cost you another enhancement bonus you could have had on your sword.

I see it impacting characters regardless of munchkinism the same. Some things arent in your arena to be the spotlight when it comes to taking them down. But rest assured, with a spell from the wizard, a prayer from the cleric, or possibly some other mechanic we havent seen, youll still be a key player. Fighters get hp, one of their jobs is take some hits for the party, its not very fun or flashy, but its pretty important.

Technik

 

[Hypersmurf]

Isn't Cold Iron just pure iron that is shaped on a cold anvil, as opposed to steel which is beaten while hot?

It's not as hard, it doesn't take as sharp an edge, but any blacksmith can manage the technique for no greater effort that forging a steel sword... they just don't normally bother, 'cos for everyday use, steel is better.

But a huge price hike for a plain iron sword seems unlikely.

And copper? Good grief.

-Hyp.